SSR BACKGROUNDER
The Security Sector
Roles and responsibilities in security provision,
management and oversight
About this series
The SSR Backgrounders provide concise introductions to topics and concepts
in good security sector governance (SSG) and security sector reform (SSR).
The series summarizes current debates, explains key terms and exposes central
tensions based on a broad range of international experiences. The SSR
Backgrounders do not promote specific models, policies or proposals for good
governance or reform but do provide further resources that will allow readers
to extend their knowledge on each topic. The SSR Backgrounders are a resource
for security governance and reform stakeholders seeking to understand but
also to critically assess current approaches to good SSG and SSR.
About this SSR Backgrounder
This SSR Backgrounder is about the security sector. The “security sector”
is a relatively new term that refers to the actors involved in the provision,
management and oversight of security in a country. But this simple definition
leaves room for different perspectives on which security actors are considered
part of the security sector in each national context, and these differences
shape approaches to SSG and SSR. This SSR Backgrounder explains different
perspectives on the security sector in terms of the roles and responsibilities
of security actors in good SSG.
This SSR Backgrounder answers the following questions:
Who is part of the security sector? Page 2
Why focus on the whole security sector instead of on national defence
or law enforcement? Page 2
Who are the state security providers? Page 4
Who is responsible for security sector management and oversight? Page 4
Is the justice sector part of the security sector? Page 6
Are non-state security and justice providers part of the security sector? Page 7
Are commercial security providers part of the security sector? Page 7
Are armed non-state actors part of the security sector? Page 8
Are external actors part of the security sector? Page 8
Why is SSR based on broader definitions of the security sector? Page 8
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Who is part of the security sector?
The security sector is composed of all the structures,
institutions and personnel responsible for security
provision, management and oversight at national and local
levels. The security sector includes both actors that use
force and those responsible for controlling how force is
used through management and oversight: these actors are
state security providers and those responsible for
security management and oversight, which includes
civil society. From the point of view of good SSG, the role
of the security sector is to provide for state and human
security. There are different definitions of the security
sector: the narrowest include only state security
institutions, while the more common definitions are more
comprehensive, including all the state and non-state actors
that influence security and justice within a state. Figure 1
shows a comprehensive definition of the security sector
(for narrower definitions see Figure 3).
Good security sector governance (SSG)
Good SSG describes how the principles of
good governance apply to security provision,
management and oversight by state and nonstate actors. The principles of good governance
are accountability, transparency, rule of law,
participation, responsiveness, effectiveness
and efficiency. Good SSG means that the
security sector provides state and human
security, effectively and accountably, within a
framework of democratic civilian control, rule
of law and respect for human rights. Good SSG
is a specific type of security gov­ernance based
on a normative standard for how the state
security sector should work in a democracy.
For more information on SSG, please refer to
the SSR Backgrounders on “Security Sector
Governance” and “Gender Equality and Good
Security Sector Governance”.
Why focus on the whole security sector instead of on
either national defence or domestic law enforcement?
Conventionally, security institutions distinguished between
external and internal security, and between national
security and public safety. Military capabilities for external
aggression and defence were considered separate from
and largely unrelated to domestic security, public safety
or law and order. This began to change as state-centric
understandings of security moved towards a more peoplecentred vision of human security.
Several factors showed that it makes sense to consider both
internal and external security, military and non-military,
national and domestic, and state and non-state security
provision together as a single area of service provision and
public responsibility.
– Human security highlighted the importance of
a secure state that can offer security to its diverse
population.
– Development actors argued that state security
institutions of all kinds should be held to
the same public management and accountability
standards as other parts of the public sector.
– Changes in international security blurred
the distinctions between internal and external
security mandates.
2
– Recognition of the interlinkages between
subsectors of state security provision, and state
and non-state security actors, showed the need
for a holistic understanding of security provision,
management and oversight.
As a result of these factors, the idea of the security sector
emerged as a more comprehensive perspective on
how the state provides for its own security and that
of individuals and communities of all backgrounds.
The term “security sector” was inspired by new public
management approaches to public service delivery, but
the term “security system” has also been used to make
the same point that security provision involves many
interconnected actors and must be considered holistically.
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Figure 1 A comprehensive definition of the security sector
Security and justice providers
State security providers
– Armed force and supporting services
– Police, specialized law enforcement agencies
– G endarmeries
– Presidential guards, close protection forces
– National guards, civil defence
– Intelligence and secret services
– Border and customs services
– Etc.
Oversight
– Legislatures/Parliaments and their specialized
committees
– Judicial authorities
– Ombuds-institutions
– Human rights commissions
– Anti-corruption commissions
– Independent complaints authorities
–A
udit offices
– Etc.
Management
– Ministry of interior, homeland security, public
security
– Ministry of justice
– Ministry of defence
– Ministry of finance
– Police Councils
– Judicial councils
– Judicial services, law commissions
– Etc.
Non-state justice providers
– Lawyers and paralegals
– Bar associations
– Legal aid bodies and public representation
programmes
– Victim support groups
– Prisoner assistance groups
– Customary justice providers
– Community dispute resolution mechanisms
– Etc.
Public and civil society oversight
– NGOs with a stake in high standards
of security and justice provision
– Human rights advocates
– Media
– V ictim’s groups
– Women’s associations
– Academic institutions
– Independent research institutes and
think tanks
– Unions and trade associations
– Political parties
– The interested public
– Etc.
Non-State
State
State justice providers
– Courts, judges, and state legal practitioners
– Defence and prosecution services
– Prisons, corrections and detention authorities
– Military justice systems
– State-sponsored alternative dispute
resolution mechanisms
– Etc.
Non-state security providers
– Unofficial armed groups
(militias, armed factions)
– Self-defence groups
– Commercial security providers, such as private
security companies, private military companies
– Neighbourhood watches
– Women’s groups
– Customary security providers
– Etc.
Security management and oversight
Based on: SSR in nutshell, ISSAT (2012: 4)
3
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Who are the state security providers?
State security providers are the security institutions
established by the state and authorized to use force on
behalf of the state. The use of force includes the threat to
use force and the limitation of certain basic rights under
specific circumstances defined by law.
Every security sector is different, but typical state security
providers include, among others:
Who is responsible for security sector management
and oversight?
Good SSG requires that security provision is managed and
overseen within a framework of democratic civilian control,
rule of law and respect for human rights. Within such a
framework, accountability is provided through internal and
external supervision of security providers. The tools and
mechanisms for supervision must be based on clear
responsibilities, a transparent process and responsiveness
to the public.
– armed forces, such as the army, navy, air forces,
coastguards and other military and auxiliary
formations;
A range of state and non-state actors are involved in
security sector management and oversight (see Figure 2).
– public law enforcement, such as police,
gendarmerie and auxiliary policing forces;
Typical roles and responsibilities in internal and external
oversight include the following.
– executive protection forces, such as presidential
guards or close protection units;
– State security providers use internal oversight
procedures to hold their personnel to high standards
of service delivery, including for example internal
disciplinary systems, supervision and performance
reviews throughout the chain of command. They
also submit to inspection by independent, external
security sector management and oversight
institutions.
– intelligence services, both military and civilian,
foreign and domestic;
– border guards and customs authorities;
– reserves and local security units, civil defence
forces, national guards, civil protection and
emergency formations, and commercial security
providers contracted by the state.
The list of state security providers will be different in
every national context – for example, not all states have
military forces or gendarmeries – but all state security
providers are included in every definition of the security
sector.
But there is more to the security sector than state
security providers. The narrowest possible definition of
the security sector that is compatible with the concept
of good SSG also includes the state structures, institutions
and personnel responsible for the management and
oversight of security provision.
4
– The executive (government, head of government and/
or state) has final say on security policy and controls
the security services through a system of executive
management and administration, often including
coordinating bodies, such as national security councils
or advisers. The executive is held accountable for
its decisions chiefly through an elected parliament
or legislature, and sometimes regular direct elections,
but also through judicial review, media scrutiny,
and public consultation and debate.
– Government ministries manage the administration,
organization and budget of the security forces on
behalf of the executive, providing the necessary
resources to implement policy. Ministries also provide
a layer of political separation between the security
forces and the last instance of political authority
(often the head of state): depending on context,
this may involve, for example, ministries of defence,
interior, justice or finance, among others.
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
– The parliament or legislature and its specialized
committees legislate on security matters; scrutinize,
amend and approve budgets for the security
sector; oversee the performance of the sector in
implementing security policy; investigate the activities
of the security forces; provide a public forum for
political parties to deliberate on security policy and
activities; and seek civil society input on security affairs.
– Justice authorities, both civilian and military, play
a role in security sector oversight by ensuring the
security forces uphold domestic and international
law in the exercise of their duties: for example
by supervising the use of special powers through
decisions about the legality of warrants,
investigations, surveillance methods or searches,
among others, and by holding security personnel
accountable for violating the law. Justice sector actors
also ensure that security policy and the actions of
the government and the security forces conform
to the established norms of constitutional order:
for example, when courts with constitutional
jurisdiction test the legality of new laws or policies.
– Special statutory institutions are state bodies
that are legally and politically independent of the
government: for example, human rights commissions,
independent complaints authorities, ombudsinstitutions, anti-corruption commissions, supreme
audit offices, and customary or traditional
authorities where they have a statutory mandate.
These organizations receive public complaints and
investigate, report on and sometimes make binding
recommendations about issues specific to their
mandates.
– Individuals, the media and civil society
organizations engage in research, debate and
advocacy among other activities, and may be critical
or supportive of the security services and
the government’s security policy. Their interest
in ensuring high standards of public and state
security provision makes them an integral part of
the security sector.
Figure 2 A range of actors are involved in security sector oversight
and management
Parliament or
legislature, specialized
committees
Internal
oversight
mechanisms
Public, civil
society and
media
Executive and
ministries
Security
provision
Justice
authorities
Constitutional
review bodies
Special
statutory
institutions
5
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Is the justice sector part of the security sector?
There are different ways to define the justice sector, but the
broadest definition includes all the agencies and actors,
both state and non-state, involved in the provision,
management and oversight of justice:
– the judiciary, defence and prosecution, and court
personnel, including military justice systems;
– government ministries, specialized parliamentary
committees and special oversight institutions
responsible for the administration and oversight
of the justice system;
– legal professionals and associated training
organizations;
– law enforcement agencies;
– prisons and corrections agencies responsible
for carrying out sentences;
– the public and civil society actors with a stake
in high standards of justice provision;
– informal and customary justice providers.
Security sector reform (SSR) SSR is the
political and technical process of improving
state and human security by making security
provision, management and oversight more
effective and more accountable, within a
framework of democratic civilian control,
rule of law and respect for human rights. The
goal of SSR is to apply the principles of
good governance to the security sector.
SSR concerns all actors involved in security
provision, management and oversight, and
covers all their roles, responsibilities and
actions. SSR programmes may focus primarily
on only one security actor or on the way the
entire system functions, as long as the goal is
always to improve both effectiveness and
accountability. Efforts to improve the efficiency
or effectiveness of the security sector cannot be
considered SSR if they do not enhance civilian
democratic control, rule of law and respect for
human rights.
For more information on SSR, please refer
to the SSR Backgrounders on “Security Sector
Reform” and “Gender Equality and Security
Sector Reform”.
The justice sector contributes to state and human security
in two distinct ways.
1. The justice sector contributes to security by
upholding the rule of law: justice institutions – both
military and civilian – uphold and enforce the rule
of law through prosecution, trials and sentencing.
Justice institutions are integral to the work of security
institutions, in particular the police.
2. The justice sector provides security sector
oversight: justice sector authorities rule on the
constitutional legality of laws governing the security
sector, and the lawfulness of the behaviour of security
sector personnel. Justice institutions also protect the
legal rights of service personnel and prevent political
manipulation of the security sector.
6
Because of the close links between justice and security
institutions, comprehensive definitions of the security
sector include all or part of the justice sector. In contrast,
narrower definitions include only oversight or criminal law
enforcement. Regardless of which justice sector actors are
included in the formal definition of the security sector, it is
important to account for the links between security and
justice in a holistic approach to SSR. For more information
on the justice sector and good SSG, please see the SSR
Backgrounder on “The Justice Sector”.
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Are non-state security and justice providers part
of the security sector?
Are commercial security providers part
of the security sector?
The state is not the only provider of security and justice:
people often act to provide for security and justice in
their own homes and communities, regardless of whether
the state acts to meet these needs or not. People organize
to provide their own security in many different ways,
including, for example, self-defence groups, neighbourhood
watches, women’s groups, and through commercial
security provision, among others.
Commercial security providers are businesses that sell their
services in the protection of people and property, and are
sometimes known as private military or security companies.
They operate on a commercial basis; their goals are not
political or criminal; and they do not have any special status
according to community, customary or traditional authority.
Their existence is regulated by the state and at the
international level, and such companies have some kind of
formal legal status that allows them to practise their
profession legitimately. The number of commercial security
providers in a town or country can be much greater than
the number of state security personnel, and they may be
better equipped and better trained than state security
providers. Commercial security providers supply private
security services unless they are contracted by states
to supply public security. But even their legitimate
activities in private security provision can affect public
security and therefore SSG. For this reason, they are
included in broad definitions of the security sector as either
security providers or civil society actors.
Even where the state does provide for security and
justice, people may still preserve alternative security
and justice practices based on customary principles,
or local traditions and beliefs, because of high levels of
local legitimacy: this can include, for example, customary
roles for important community figures in security and
justice decision-making; alternative dispute resolution
mechanisms; and rituals, traditions or informal rules that
affect security and justice in the community. In some states
certain security functions conventionally carried out by
public security forces have been outsourced to commercial
security providers.
Non-state security and justice providers have a direct effect
on SSG at the local level, but they are only included in
broader definitions of the security sector because their
relationship to state authority and state security providers
is not always clear. In some cases, non-state security and
justice providers (especially commercial non-state actors)
may have a formal or semi-formal status under the law, in
which case they are included in narrower definitions of the
security sector as state security providers. Whether or not
non-state security and justice providers are included in
the security sector depends on the national context,
but in all cases it is important to consider non-state
security providers in a holistic approach to SSR and to
account for their role in security sector oversight.
7
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Are armed non-state actors part of the security sector?
In contrast to commercial security providers, armed nonstate actors use force to achieve political or criminal
goals outside the remit of state control. They can include
criminal or political organizations, such as guerrilla fighters,
insurgents, rebels, liberation armies, organized crime
groups, political party militia and terrorists, among others.
The activities of armed non-state actors are often illegitimate
and illegal from the point of view of the state, although they
may be legitimate in the eyes of their supporters. Although
their political status is subjective, the use of force by
armed non-state actors can affect public and national
security for all people and the state, and for this reason
they are included in the very broadest definitions
of the security sector. The goal of SSR is to bring the use
of force under legitimate state control within a framework
of rule of law and respect for human rights. This involves
disarming non-state armed actors and, depending on the
situation, bringing them before the law. Including armed
non-state actors in the definition of the security sector
remains a controversial issue, in particular because of fears
that recognizing their impact on security may confer
indirect political legitimacy.
Are external actors part of the security sector?
External actors sometimes have an important impact on
security within a state, whether as occupying troops,
peacekeeping forces, commercial actors or allies offering
assistance. In post-conflict contexts, external actors may
have a disproportionately important impact on security
and SSR, because foreign forces may provide security in
an unstable situation and external assistance plays a large
part in post-conflict peacebuilding, including SSR. For
these reasons, external actors may be included in broad
definitions of the security sector, especially in post-conflict
contexts. In reform contexts where there is little or no
external involvement, external actors are usually not
considered part of the security sector.
8
Why is SSR based on broader definitions
of the security sector?
Because SSR focuses on improving both effectiveness and
accountability, it can only be based on a definition of the
security sector that includes all the institutions and
personnel responsible for security provision, management
and oversight. Most definitions of the security sector also
include the state justice system, because of its role in
upholding rule of law. Figure 3 shows that SSR can be based
on a variety of broad and narrow definitions of the security
sector but definitions of the security sector that focus
only on state security providers while excluding
security oversight and management are not compatible
with SSR.
Focusing on state-based security provision, oversight and
management is only the narrowest definition of the security
sector compatible with SSR. Broader definitions of the
sector are more comprehensive and recognize the reality
that non-state actors influence how security services are
delivered by the state. Broadening the definition of the
security sector to include all actors involved in security
provision – both state and non-state, legal and illegal
– provides a clearer and more accurate picture of the
actual security dynamics that affect state and human
security.
Basing SSR on the broadest definition of the sector does
not legitimize armed non-state actors, but does allow for
more realistic reforms that restore state responsibility for
security provision within a framework of democratic civilian
control, rule of law and respect for human rights: the goal
of including armed non-state actors in the security sector
is always to eliminate abuses and enhance state and human
security.
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Figure 3 Narrower and broader definitions of the security sector
Not compatible with SSR
Narrowest
Narrow
Broad
Broader
Broadest
State security providers only
e.g. police, armed forces,
intelligence, etc.
State security providers AND security oversight
and management bodies, including civil society and
justice institutions involved in oversight
e.g. parliaments, ministries, courts, ombuds-institutions,
women’s groups, academia, media, among others.
State justice institutions closely linked to security provision
e.g. actors in criminal justice or entire justice sector.
Non-state security and justice providers
e.g. commercial security providers, community security groups, customary justice providers.
External actors supporting national SSR efforts
e.g. in transition or post-conflict contexts.
Armed non-state actors
e.g armed groups that use force to achieve political or criminal goals outside the remit of state control,
including criminal or political organizations.
9
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
Further resources
For a description of SSR according to different elements of
the security sector:
– OECD Development Assistance Committee
Section 7: Implementing SSR Sector by Sector
in OECD DAC Handbook on Security System Reform:
Supporting Security and Justice (Paris: Organisation
for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2007,
pp. 112-235.)
For a description of the different elements of the security
sector with respect to gender and SSR:
– Megan Bastick and Kristin Valasek (eds)
Gender and Security Sector Reform Toolkit
(Geneva: DCAF, OSCE/ODIHR, UN-INSTRAW, 2008).
– Hans Born, Philipp Fluri and Anders Johnsson (eds)
Parliamentary Oversight of the Security Sector:
Principles, Mechanisms and Practices
Handbook For Parliamentarians 5
(Geneva: DCAF, 2003).
This publication is available in 37 languages other
than English at www.dcaf.ch
For more a detailed guide to the roles and responsibilities of
civil society organizations in the security sector:
– Eden Cole, Kerstin Eppert and Katrin Kinzelbach (eds)
Public Oversight of the Security Sector:
A Handbook for Civil Society Organizations
(Bratislava: UNDP, 2008).
For more on the distinctive roles and responsibilities of
some state security providers:
– Albrecht Schnabel and Marc Krupanski
Mapping Evolving Internal Roles of
the Armed Forces
SSR Paper 7 (Geneva: DCAF, 2012).
On aspects of commercial security provision and
the security sector:
– Anne-Marie Buzatu and Benjamin S. Buckland
Private Military and Security Companies:
Future Challenges in Security Governance
Horizon 2015 Working Paper Series 3
(Geneva: DCAF, 2010).
– Derek Lutterbeck
The Paradox of Gendarmeries: Between
Expansion, Demilitarization and Dissolution
SSR Paper 8 (Geneva: DCAF, 2013).
More DCAF SSR resources
For a more detailed guide to the role of parliaments and
legislatures in the security sector:
– Hans Born and Marc Bentinck
Parliamentary Oversight of the Security Sector
(Brussels: European Parliament-OPPD, 2013).
– Teodora Fuior
Parliamentary Powers in Security Sector
Governance
(Geneva: DCAF, 2011).
10
– DCAF publishes a wide variety of tools, handbooks
and guidance on all aspects of SSR and good SSG,
available free-for-download at www.dcaf.ch
Many resources are also available in languages other
than English.
– The DCAF-ISSAT Community of Practice website
makes available a range of online learning resources
for SSR practitioners at http://issat.dcaf.ch
DCAF SSR B ACKGROUNDER | The Security Sector
The Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of
Armed Forces (DCAF) is an international foundation
whose mission is to assist the international community
in pursuing good governance and reform of the
security sector. DCAF develops and promotes norms
and standards, conducts tailored policy research,
identifies good practices and recommen­dations
to promote democratic security sector governance,
and provides in‐country advisory support and
practical assistance programmes.
DCAF wishes to thank
Petra Gurtner for production and design;
Cherry Ekins for copy editing in English;
Lynda Chenaf for copy editing in French;
Linda Machata for translation into French; and
Fernando Colaço for app development.
Series editor
Fairlie Chappuis
To cite this publication
Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed
Forces, “The Security Sector”, SSR Backgrounder Series
(Geneva: DCAF, 2015).
© DCAF. SSR Backgrounders are available free of
charge from www.dcaf.ch. Users may copy and
distribute this material provided that DCAF is credited.
Not for commercial use.
11
Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control
of Armed Forces (DCAF)
P. O. Box 1360
CH-1211 Geneva 1
Switzerland
Read the SSR Backgrounders online or
download the free SSR Backgrounders app
for smartphones and tablets at
www.ssrbackgrounders.org